The engraving of the crossguard is really beautiful but when I look at the pictures closely I noticed a few interesting things. First: the crossguard is a type 1 Eickhorn while the blade is made by WKC. Second: the pommel isn't an early type while the crossguard is dated 1935. Third: the scabbard isn't the early version by WKC with the two sidescrews. Instead it has the later single sidescrew config. Again, not conforming with the early dated engraving. Just some food for thought.

Will not opine on the dagger itself but a bit of advice on the inscription. Typically, when achaeologists/paleographers study inscriptions and try to determine if they are fake or original, they will look to see if the "wear" and patina goes thru ( or on top for the Patina) the inscriptions or if the inscriptions have been placed over the wear and patina (indicating a fake). Example is the whole "James, brother of Jesus" ossuary (i.e. limestone box used to put the bones of the deceased) controversy over the last few years.

If you have a good 40x loop, you might be able to look into this (although I am sure the equiptment available to the Paleographers is much more advanced)

Just a thought to try and help!

Regards,

Michael

"Please", Thank You" and proper manners appreciated

My greatest fear is that one day I will die and my wife will sell my guns for what I told her I paid for them

"Don't tell me these are investments if you never intend to sell anything" (Quote: Wife)

Because there are a number of what appear to be, and/or are questionable PW personalizations out there (noting Michael's (MAP) comments), I must confess to doing just that digitally and it seemed to be OK. Which is where I stopped. Now it seems that I should have looked more at the other details. , Best Regards, Fred